ESHWARAMMA Vs. M.CHANDAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal, under Order XLIII Rule 1 C.P.C., is filed by the appellants/plaintiffs, aggrieved by the order and decree, dtd. 24/2/2022, passed in I.A.No.235 of 2021 in I.A.No.832 of 2012 in O.S.No.911 of 2007, by the learned IV Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar, whereby, the subject I.A. filed by the appellants/plaintiffs, under Order IX Rule 9 read with Sec. 151 C.P.C., seeking to set aside the dismissal order, dtd. 16/3/2021, passed in I.A.No.832 of 2012 and restore I.A.No.832 of 2012 to its file, was dismissed.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for both sides and perused the record.

(3.) As seen from the material placed on record, I.A.No.832 of 2012 in O.S.No.911 of 2007 on the file of learned IV Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar, filed by the appellants/plaintiffs for restoration of the subject Suit was allowed conditionally i.e., subject to payment of costs of Rs.1,000.00 by the appellants/plaintiffs to the other side. Time was extended from time to time for payment of costs. Admittedly, the costs were not paid. Since the said condition was not complied with and there was no representation for the appellants/plaintiffs, the Court below, by order, dtd. 16/3/2021, dismissed I.A.No.832 of 2012 for default. The operative portion of the order, dtd. 16/3/2021, reads as follows: